Posted for the example of close quarter skills - and the speed and chaos with which things happen in the field. There are some tactical and decision making issues in both instances that are readily debriefed - or MMQB-ed. Suffice it to say the real world is messy, and we don't always make the best decisions or choices in open environments.
https://vimeo.com/99253496
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zv5Cbgn4TOU
Thanks Kit. I don't think people realize the mental and physical fortitude that law enforcement officers might have to call on at any given time. It is also difficult for people to understand the chaos that can surround even the most basic and "routine" call for service. I've ridden on that bus when a friend and partner is severely injured in the back and there is uncertainty if you'll ever see him again. Not a cool feeling (although I'm sure it is worse riding in the back!). These videos should remind all of us to train hard and keep our skills sharp and updated.
I used to live very close to that area, been to that walmart several times throughout my life. The reaction to that video from the public in that area of Arizona has actually been very positive, and from what I hear that police department is one of the better ones. They used up all their non-lethal options, and short of suddenly becoming adept at hand-to-hand, they definitely acted appropriately in my opinion.
Well it would be easy enough to say that in the gas station incident officer should have gone right to gun and not used the taser but I think the more useful line to take is to inquire "why" he might have made that choice.
My initial thoughts: has the way in which training has been structured lead him to taser usage? Does a man trying to light a (potentially devastating) fire fit very easily into the decision-making formulas/structures that the officer or we use to determine our level of response to a threat? There was no "weapon" visible or being brandished other than flame. Obviously a hugely dangerous threat, yet much different than a knife, gun, screwdriver, etc. in terms of how we might process the moment.
The proper response to a weapon being brandished is normally to exercise lethal force. You employ tazers when you are in a altercation that your unable to resolve without tools.Quote:
Originally Posted by allan
Al I think you are more correct in that it didn't figure into his lethal force paradigm. It was most assuredly a lethal threat.
The more pressing issue is that the taser was a bad choice due to the possibility of fumes - taser deployment could have ignited the whole thing anyway. Taser itself trains not to use the tool when, for example, flammable carriers for OC are used due to the potential for ignition. We had a suspect tased once with one probe getting into a lighter he had in his pocket. Everyone was surprised when it caught fire. In this case, that would have been particularly bad.
This officer was trained in that very thing if he was trained properly and re-certed yearly with the taser. The thing is we don't always "know" what we think we know, won't always do what we think we will - or as we have been trained to do - when we have to make decisions, when our attention is on other things, when stress hits, etc.
Sorry Allan, I did not read your comment properly. Though you were talking about the the AZ incident.
Axel,Quote:
Originally Posted by Axel
No problem and welcome to the discussion on this sub-forum. Nice to have a new participant.
Kit,
As usual you phrase and frame things very clearly.
What was the scenario in the Walmart lot? That looked like a nightmare. I'm a pacifist through and through but wouldn't have blamed any cop in that scenario if they fired. They were overwhelmed.
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/...elee/70346668/
For those not aware, Walmart is in the habit of allowing people to camp in their lots. People living out of cars, campers, etc.
Until they don't want you there any more and ask you to leave....
And that's just outside the store:
https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-walmart-crime/